Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

FuzzingBrain-Bench introduces a novel evaluation framework that shifts the focus from triggering predefined vulnerabilities to measuring an LLM's ability to discover arbitrary crashes in open-source software. By instrumenting harnesses with sanitizers, this benchmark captures real-world bug discovery capabilities that traditional methods often miss, highlighting significant performance gaps among current models like Claude Opus 4.8. This work advances the field by providing a more rigorous testbed for assessing the practical utility of AI in software security and automated fuzzing.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

FuzzingBrain-Bench V1: Evaluating Open-Ended Bug Discovery by LLMs

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.25158v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to discover software bugs is increasingly important. Existing benchmarks typically evaluate this capability by asking the model to generate a proof-of-concept input that triggers a predefined target vulnerability. However, this setup may overlook valid crashes discovered by the model when they do not match the predefined target. As a result, the evaluation may not reflect the model's real capability. We present FuzzingBrain-Bench, a benchmark for assessing AI models' ability to discover bugs in open-source software. Models are given an open-source project and a sanitizer-instrumented harness in a self-contained Docker image. Their goal is to generate inputs that trigger as many distinct crashes as possible through the harness. A model's performance on each challenge is scored based on the number of distinct crash signatures it produces, capped at a predefined maximum and weighted by a difficulty coefficient. FuzzingBrain-Bench V1 consists of 77 challenges drawn from 43 open-source projects, with 36 C, 32 C++, and 9 Java/JVM challenges. We evaluate Claude Haiku 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Claude Opus 4.8 on the full benchmark. Claude Opus 4.8 performs best, triggering crashes in 60 of 77 challenges and achieving a score of 196 out of 579. None of the three models triggers a crash in 13 challenges. The FuzzingBrain-Bench corpus and harnesses are publicly available at https://github.com/fuzzingbrain/FuzzingBrain-Bench.

Abstract:Evaluating the ability of large language models (LLMs) to discover software bugs is increasingly important. Existing benchmarks typically evaluate this capability by asking the model to generate a proof-of-concept input that triggers a predefined target vulnerability. However, this setup may overlook valid crashes discovered by the model when they do not match the predefined target. As a result, the evaluation may not reflect the model's real capability. We present FuzzingBrain-Bench, a benchmark for assessing AI models' ability to discover bugs in open-source software. Models are given an open-source project and a sanitizer-instrumented harness in a self-contained Docker image. Their goal is to generate inputs that trigger as many distinct crashes as possible through the harness. A model's performance on each challenge is scored based on the number of distinct crash signatures it produces, capped at a predefined maximum and weighted by a difficulty coefficient. FuzzingBrain-Bench V1 consists of 77 challenges drawn from 43 open-source projects, with 36 C, 32 C++, and 9 Java/JVM challenges. We evaluate Claude Haiku 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and Claude Opus 4.8 on the full benchmark. Claude Opus 4.8 performs best, triggering crashes in 60 of 77 challenges and achieving a score of 196 out of 579. None of the three models triggers a crash in 13 challenges. The FuzzingBrain-Bench corpus and harnesses are publicly available at this https URL.

21 pages, 12 figures, 7 tables. Ze Sheng and Aleksandar Kezic contributed equally. Benchmark corpus and harnesses: this https URL Counts verified against the built PDF and sources: 21 pages, 12 figure environments, 7 tables

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Software Engineering (cs.SE)

arXiv:2608.25158 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2608.25158v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.25158 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 287 words

Related coverage